Jane, there are parents who are very frustrated/unhappy because their well-socialized, well-prepared kids are trapped in a holding pattern because of the disruptive, ill-prepared and uninterested. Many of them remove their families to private schools or home-school. Bad behavior and attitudes are contagious. From my experience, the reluctance of families in the leafy suburbs to accept a large influx of low-SES kids has much more to do with behavior than race or income. I’ve seen the effects first-hand.

I don’t know much about the Canadian system, but I think I’ve heard that there is a gap between the First Peoples and others; is that accurate? I’m very wary about extrapolating from practices in Finland; it’s not only a much smaller population, it is much more homogeneous. Japan is often held up as an example and I am equally unconvinced of its validity; not only is Japan exceedingly homogeneous, it is ferociously dedicated to education (”education moms”, cram schools, suicides after GATEWAY exam failures).

Seriously, if we had the sense to listen to our teachers, or even teachers in places like Canada and Finland, we might solve some of our educational problems.

I have no problem with a moderate amount of such coaching (even though I’d rather see children arrive at school age not needing it). It just seems to me that if 80-90% of students are needing this coaching, something is really wrong that needs to be dealt with earlier in life.

That’s an interesting reaction to PBIS. (BTW i was anonymous, I just forgot to write my name in the post) I don’t agree that there would be an equity issue. If the 10-15% of kids are as a negative a force on the classroom and their peers as this study suggests they are, then wouldn’t other parents want those students’ needs addressed? Then the issue is, how should they be addressed? suspensions? exclusions? or something else?

To me, the universal interventions do not seem especially intrusive. They seem like the things good schools do inherently: Be clear with students about expected behavior; be clear with students about consequences for inappropriate behavior; praise good behavior regularly; use instances of bad behavior as chance to teach not just punish. Its hard for me to believe any parent could have a problem with a school adopting this kind of mindset. Even if they’ve already taught appropriate behavior, wouldn’t they want it reinforced at school? And when you consider that a positive, proactive approach to behavior has been proven to increase time on task and academic achievement for all students, it seems increasingly unlikely to me that parents would object to PBIS on the grounds that distributes resources unequally.

It is important to note that in most schools where PBIS is implemented those basic principles only take care of about 80-90% of students. The remaining moderate and high needs students require more focused, individualized attention along the lines of behavioral analysis, behavior intervention plans, and wraparound services.

However, as I read through the descriptions of how PBS is implemented, I could not help but think, “what parents that had already taken the time and effort to train and nurture their children to respect others, control their impulses, and so forth, wouldn’t be very upset about the huge investment of teacher, student, and administrator time that this system requires? and on another level, how can children who are already adequately socialized not feel that their school experience is awfully mickey mouse if other children are getting a preschool curriculum in proper behavior? if you have an entire school full of children who would benefit from this approach, fine (although sad); but if you implement this system in order to alter the behavior of only 10% or 15%, there’s an equity issue going on.

I couldn’t agree more. But how do we create that classroom? Do we exclude the children who exhibit poor behavior? Or is it possible to include them in the warm nurturing classroom. I think we can, and I don’t think it takes “superstar” teachers.

Momof4 –
I agree with you too, at least in terms of teaching behavior. There is a lot of research going on around the framework of positive behavior supports. I’m not an expert on it, but one of the basic premises of this framework is that behavior is learned and therefore can be taught. I’d encourage you to check out http://www.pbis.org and read a bit about it…see if it reflects you’re thinking on the subject.

As someone who works with students in the Juvenile Justice system, the more important question (at least to me) is how do you prevent this behavior from happening? And when it does happen – as it inevitably will – how do you intervene? For the most at risk kids (the bad apples) I think classroom exclusions will only exacerbate the problem. The kids I wind up working with usually have a long history of in school and out of school suspensions – to say nothing of unmet special education needs. When you look at the amount of money we end up paying on the “bad apple” kids throughout their life, spending a bit more to provide evidence based interventions and supports in and outside of school to prevent further deterioration and promote more positive, constructive behavior, seems like a worthwhile idea.